[h=1]SYLVIA LIM: WE DID NOT AGREE WITH NEA SO WE CARRIED ON WITH THE FAIR[/h]
<!-- /.block --> <style>.node-article .field-name-link-line-above-tags{float: right;}.node-article .field-name-ad-box-in-article {float: left;margin: 15px 15px 10px 0;}.node-article .field-tags{clear: both;}</style> Post date:
16 Oct 2014 - 8:54pm
<ins id="aswift_0_expand" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: currentColor; width: 336px; height: 280px; display: inline-table; visibility: visible; position: relative; background-color: transparent; border-image: none;"><ins id="aswift_0_anchor" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: currentColor; width: 336px; height: 280px; display: block; visibility: visible; position: relative; background-color: transparent; border-image: none;"><iframe name="aswift_0" width="336" height="280" id="aswift_0" frameBorder="0" marginWidth="0" marginHeight="0" scrolling="no" vspace="0" hspace="0" allowfullscreen="true" style="left: 0px; top: 0px; position: absolute;" allowTransparency="true"></iframe></ins></ins>
Sylvia Lim was on the stand again today for a cross examination in the case of the ‘unlicensed’ fair held in the WP ward in January this year.
Ms Lim explained that NEA’s application forms for a permit for a trade fair were not suitable as the fair that had actually occurred was a community event or mini fair that only involved 5 stalls.
The event ran from January 9 to 30 and saw the stalls selling lunar new year festive decorations, cookies and potted plants.
NEA accused the town council of having held an unlicensed fair and summoned them but the WP town council is disputing the summon saying that theirs was not a fair that needed a license.
NEA explained in court that they had told AHPETC that they needed a permit under Section 35 of the Environmental Public Health Act.
When Ms Lim was asked why her town council had never asserted to NEA that it did not need a permit, Ms Lim replied that her town council did not have the authority to do so.
Ms Lim pointed to a letter dated January 9 when WP chief, Low Thia Khiang, explained to NEA that their fair was an event of a community nature rather than a commercial one.
The prosecutions argued that because WP had submitted the permit application forms, they had accepted NEA’s requirement that they would need a permit.
<ins id="aswift_1_expand" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: currentColor; width: 336px; height: 280px; display: inline-table; visibility: visible; position: relative; background-color: transparent; border-image: none;"><ins id="aswift_1_anchor" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: currentColor; width: 336px; height: 280px; display: block; visibility: visible; position: relative; background-color: transparent; border-image: none;"><iframe name="aswift_1" width="336" height="280" id="aswift_1" frameBorder="0" marginWidth="0" marginHeight="0" scrolling="no" vspace="0" hspace="0" allowfullscreen="true" style="left: 0px; top: 0px; position: absolute;" allowTransparency="true"></iframe></ins></ins>
Ms Lim explained that this was not the case. The town council had filled up the application forms to try and avoid any trouble but they still did not agree that they needed a permit.
She also explained that they went ahead with the event as they did not agree with NEA’s actions. MS Lim explained that sometimes “these matters” must be settled in court as there is no point going through circular arguments with NEA.
The trial concluded today and the judge is expected to give his decision at the end of November.
If the AHPETC is found guilty of holding an unlicensed fair, they could be fined up to $1,000.
<!-- /.block --> <style>.node-article .field-name-link-line-above-tags{float: right;}.node-article .field-name-ad-box-in-article {float: left;margin: 15px 15px 10px 0;}.node-article .field-tags{clear: both;}</style> Post date:
16 Oct 2014 - 8:54pm
<ins id="aswift_0_expand" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: currentColor; width: 336px; height: 280px; display: inline-table; visibility: visible; position: relative; background-color: transparent; border-image: none;"><ins id="aswift_0_anchor" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: currentColor; width: 336px; height: 280px; display: block; visibility: visible; position: relative; background-color: transparent; border-image: none;"><iframe name="aswift_0" width="336" height="280" id="aswift_0" frameBorder="0" marginWidth="0" marginHeight="0" scrolling="no" vspace="0" hspace="0" allowfullscreen="true" style="left: 0px; top: 0px; position: absolute;" allowTransparency="true"></iframe></ins></ins>
Sylvia Lim was on the stand again today for a cross examination in the case of the ‘unlicensed’ fair held in the WP ward in January this year.
Ms Lim explained that NEA’s application forms for a permit for a trade fair were not suitable as the fair that had actually occurred was a community event or mini fair that only involved 5 stalls.
The event ran from January 9 to 30 and saw the stalls selling lunar new year festive decorations, cookies and potted plants.
NEA accused the town council of having held an unlicensed fair and summoned them but the WP town council is disputing the summon saying that theirs was not a fair that needed a license.
NEA explained in court that they had told AHPETC that they needed a permit under Section 35 of the Environmental Public Health Act.
When Ms Lim was asked why her town council had never asserted to NEA that it did not need a permit, Ms Lim replied that her town council did not have the authority to do so.
Ms Lim pointed to a letter dated January 9 when WP chief, Low Thia Khiang, explained to NEA that their fair was an event of a community nature rather than a commercial one.
The prosecutions argued that because WP had submitted the permit application forms, they had accepted NEA’s requirement that they would need a permit.
<ins id="aswift_1_expand" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: currentColor; width: 336px; height: 280px; display: inline-table; visibility: visible; position: relative; background-color: transparent; border-image: none;"><ins id="aswift_1_anchor" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: currentColor; width: 336px; height: 280px; display: block; visibility: visible; position: relative; background-color: transparent; border-image: none;"><iframe name="aswift_1" width="336" height="280" id="aswift_1" frameBorder="0" marginWidth="0" marginHeight="0" scrolling="no" vspace="0" hspace="0" allowfullscreen="true" style="left: 0px; top: 0px; position: absolute;" allowTransparency="true"></iframe></ins></ins>
Ms Lim explained that this was not the case. The town council had filled up the application forms to try and avoid any trouble but they still did not agree that they needed a permit.
She also explained that they went ahead with the event as they did not agree with NEA’s actions. MS Lim explained that sometimes “these matters” must be settled in court as there is no point going through circular arguments with NEA.
The trial concluded today and the judge is expected to give his decision at the end of November.
If the AHPETC is found guilty of holding an unlicensed fair, they could be fined up to $1,000.
